Top 5 Most Disappointing Recruits in 2016

Remove this Banner Ad

Schraderbrau said:
On the Aish trade it depends on how you view the draft. We were on record as having no respect for last years draft, we ended up using our second round pick (30) on a player no one had heard of. I also remember reading somewhere that if we didn't use our pick 30 on Sier we would have used it on Tom Phillips who we drafted with pick 58. So the Aish trade was, on our view, nowhere near as much as you make it sound.

Also his form has been pretty decent the 6 weeks and when you consider the number of more seasoned and worse performed players fighting to get into the top 5 it seems harsh putting Aish in there imo.
Click to expand...


haha all clubs say they wanted blah blah an got him with a later pick,club PR... like us with smith two drafts ago.
2 first round picks on a soft out side flanker was a mistake an even last game he turned it over a lot, but in saying that i'd only have him 4th in disappointing recruits
 

Log in to remove this ad.

DAWESOME!! said:
Have any of the Giants offcuts the Blues took done much?
Click to expand...

Plowman has been very good. We're much improved defensively and he has been a big part of that improvement.

Phillips has been very serviceable working mainly in tandem with Kreuzer. Athletically he's very gifted so he looks phenomenal at times but then won't be sighted for long periods, so needs to improve on his consistency.

Sumner came to the club with a serious injury and most thought wouldn't get a senior game this year, but he has surprised. Doesn't get involved enough but shows flashes of serious talent. Needs another uninterrupted preseason.

Lamb has been OK but not much more than that. Works hard but doesn't get involved enough at this stage.

Overall we're very happy with what they've produced - certainly none of them deserve to be anywhere near this list - and I have no we'd be happy to go down a similar path again with GWS at the end of this year.
 
Old navy said:
Are you trying to tell me that the saints would have taken Gresham at 6?
His been good but I seriously doubt it.
Also Carlisle hasnt been on the field, but I doubt the Saints would be happy about his little home movies.
Has bought unnecessary heat to the club.
Click to expand...

Ask yourself this, at pick 6 would you get a better player than Jake Carlisle? The realistic answer is probably not. St Kilda really only downgraded pick 6 to 18 anyway, and Carlisle is a 10 year CHB for them, and they still get a highly credentialed midfielder in Jake Gresham at pick 18. It was a very even draft, from pick 5 to 20 last year you could make arguments for about 30 players.
 
Old navy said:
Are you trying to tell me that the saints would have taken Gresham at 6?
His been good but I seriously doubt it.
Also Carlisle hasnt been on the field, but I doubt the Saints would be happy about his little home movies.
Has bought unnecessary heat to the club.
Click to expand...
The coke thing was disappointing no doubt about it, but it was filmed whilst he wasn't a part of our club so didn't really bring that much heat in all reality. But yes we would've taken Gresham at 6, look at Brett Anderson's rankings for last year, only 1 bloke but watches the draft very very closely, had him above Parish. Gresh is a serious impact player that had he been playing full time mid all year, like Parish effectively has, would've been given a similar level of praise, once he starts hitting 25+ disposals in games which will come with more midfield time he'll be very effective for us.
 
LukeParkerno1 said:
Ask yourself this, at pick 6 would you get a better player than Jake Carlisle? The realistic answer is probably not. St Kilda really only downgraded pick 6 to 18 anyway, and Carlisle is a 10 year CHB for them, and they still get a highly credentialed midfielder in Jake Gresham at pick 18. It was a very even draft, from pick 5 to 20 last year you could make arguments for about 30 players.
Click to expand...
Exactly. It killed 2 birds with 1 stone, and as I said there's a very good chance we would've picked Gresh anyway at 6.
 
Gresham was a great pick, if we had a pick available he would have been one of the ones I would have selected. The one thing you know about Gresham is he will compete and he works both ways- defence and attack, and those mids are always better long term.
 
Roadto2018 said:
Exactly. It killed 2 birds with 1 stone, and as I said there's a very good chance we would've picked Gresh anyway at 6.
Click to expand...

Yep, you get a mid and you get a CHB after getting your 10 year Full Foward the year before in McCartin. Did you overpay for Carlisle, maybe on face value but you still got a first rounder as well as him. People seem to forget you got pick 18 back. It wasn't just pick 5 for Carlisle.
 
LukeParkerno1 said:
Yep, you get a mid and you get a CHB after getting your 10 year Full Foward the year before in McCartin. Did you overpay for Carlisle, maybe on face value but you still got a first rounder as well as him. People seem to forget you got pick 18 back. It wasn't just pick 5 for Carlisle.
Click to expand...

Glad it's not just saints fans who can work that out. Now, can you kindly please let some so called "experts" in the media know so I don't have to put up with one more "pick 5 for carlisle" comment.
 
LukeParkerno1 said:
Ask yourself this, at pick 6 would you get a better player than Jake Carlisle? The realistic answer is probably not. St Kilda really only downgraded pick 6 to 18 anyway, and Carlisle is a 10 year CHB for them, and they still get a highly credentialed midfielder in Jake Gresham at pick 18. It was a very even draft, from pick 5 to 20 last year you could make arguments for about 30 players.
Click to expand...

Carlisle will be 25 before he plays his first Saints game. You reckon he's playing elite footy till 35? Not unless snorting is discovered to reverse the aging process.
 
Keg on legs said:
Glad it's not just saints fans who can work that out. Now, can you kindly please let some so called "experts" in the media know so I don't have to put up with one more "pick 5 for carlisle" comment.
Click to expand...

The media have no idea, I rarely pay any attention to them.

It was a fair deal for both sides (well 3 if you include Sydney as we got more points)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

TwentyNine said:
Carlisle will be 25 before he plays his first Saints game. You reckon he's playing elite footy till 35? Not unless snorting is discovered to reverse the aging process.
Click to expand...

35 isn't that old especially when he has had a year off to freshen up. I actually think the year off for these players will prolong their careers.
 
King Wavo said:
With Carlisle you get all the behaviour problems of Bennell, all the ASASA issues of Melksham all for pick 5 and 600,000-800,000 a year. Classic St Kilda.
Click to expand...

Jesus Christ

Where to begin with this muppet
 
Happy to admit that the Freeman deal may not end up a great one for us, but for a pick in the late 20's (which will end up in the 30's) We haven't lost a lot.

As for the Carlisle deal, I think it's a bloody beauty for us. We've got a very talented CHB who will hold down the spot for the best part of ten years as well as a very exciting young midfielder in Gresham who has already shown that he is a big game player that stands up when needed.

Once it was obvious that we weren't going to get Parish with our pick 5 it was going to be a deal worth looking at, as after Parish the draft bacame very even and we ended up with a player we would have at least been looking at anyway.

Sydney entering that deal made it a win/win. Not sure what they got out of it, just doing us both a solid.
 
bird_man said:
I think the points difference wa Ma very little iirc? And I think in the end you didn't need the extra points anyway. But yeah I know what you mean.
Click to expand...

Helped us with our later picks and at the time we hadn't made a decision on Dunkley. Think the difference was 150 odd points so not much but helped with the later picks
 
LukeParkerno1 said:
35 isn't that old especially when he has had a year off to freshen up. I actually think the year off for these players will prolong their careers.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of players retire well before that age - you can hardly consider 10 years of footy from him to be a given. IMO they can bank on at most five good years from him, and that's assuming his lack of professionalism doesn't derail his career completely.
 
I can't believe people getting stuck into Carlisle and Bennell, that's being very short sighted in a 5 - 8 year plan. I would take Bennell in a heart beat for what Freo paid.
Would never take Carlise back though, I just don't like his attitude when losing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Do the top prospects avoid the draft combine?
Replies
1
Views
755
MarkJohnson#1
MarkJohnson#1
The Nostradamus
Recommitted Todd Marshall [signs 5 year deal]
2 3 4 5
Replies
110
Views
7K
Anynameyouwish
A
Ticky009
Rumour Dogs offer Morphett a 5 year deal
Replies
22
Views
1K
Teen Wolf
Teen Wolf
B
ABC article on the games most valuable players
Replies
3
Views
342
WalshistheGOAT
WalshistheGOAT
Crow till I die
  • Poll
Recommitted Mason Redman [re-signed for 5 years]
40 41 42 43 44
Replies
1K
Views
55K
cAsEy_18
cAsEy_18
Mofra
Phantom Draft Mofra's cynical and ill-thought out mock draft (top 25)
Replies
10
Views
3K
Flags_In_The_Bag
Flags_In_The_Bag
dean33
Traded Ivan Soldo [Traded with #50 to Port Adelaide for #41, #49, F2 and F4]
2 3 4 5
Replies
109
Views
4K
nut
nut

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top